Skip to main content
Glama

capture_inject_sync

Capture a feedback topic while injecting an excitation signal in one call, enabling closed-loop controller tuning without disk I/O.

Instructions

Capture a topic in memory while injecting an excitation signal — one call, zero disk I/O.

Preferred closed-loop tuning path in simulation (target_mode="sim") or high-bandwidth wired setups: combines capture_topic_sync-style in-memory sampling with inject_signal-style safe publishing, server-side.

Parameters:

  • capture_topic: Feedback ROS topic to sample (e.g. "/controllers/gimbal_controller/pos_state").

  • inject_topic: Command topic to publish to — inject at the controller INPUT (e.g. "/controllers/gimbal_controller/command"), NOT the PID output stage.

  • field: Message field to drive (e.g. "traj_yaw").

  • waveform / amplitude / frequency / duration_sec / publish_rate_hz / extra_fields / force / confirm_token: forwarded verbatim to inject_signal — all safety gates (red-tier confirm_token handshake, exclusive publisher arbitration, quiet-state restoration) are owned by inject_signal and NOT pre-consumed here.

  • dry_run: if True, skip the capture subscriber and perform only the inject_signal schema/no-publish check. Safe for e2e schema validation without a live ROS master; all confirmation semantics remain delegated to inject_signal.

  • quiet_window_sec: extra capture time AFTER the injection ends so the quiet-state restoration is fully sampled.

  • fields: capture field paths; omit for auto-discovery (GimbalPosState / PidState).

  • max_messages: capture sample cap.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldYes
forceNo
fieldsNo
dry_runNo
waveformNostep
amplitudeNo
frequencyNo
duration_secNo
extra_fieldsNo
inject_topicYes
max_messagesNo
capture_topicYes
confirm_tokenNo
publish_rate_hzNo
quiet_window_secNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: zero disk I/O, server-side execution, safety gates delegated to inject_signal (confirm_token handshake, publisher arbitration, quiet-state restoration), dry_run behavior (skips capture, only schema check), and quiet_window_sec for sampling after injection. This is thorough and transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description starts with a concise headline capturing the essence, then uses a bulleted parameter list for details. Each sentence adds value, and the organization makes it easy to scan. No fluff or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (15 parameters, combined capture+inject), the description covers all critical aspects: operation, safety delegation, dry_run behavior, quiet window, and parameter purposes. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The context is complete for an agent to understand when and how to use this tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains every parameter: capture_topic/inject_topic with examples, field as message field, waveform/amplitude/etc. as forwarded to inject_signal, dry_run semantics, quiet_window_sec purpose, fields for capture paths, max_messages cap. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Capture a topic in memory while injecting an excitation signal — one call, zero disk I/O.' It names the combined functionality and distinguishes from siblings by referencing capture_topic_sync and inject_signal styles. This is a specific verb+resource with scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use: 'Preferred closed-loop tuning path in simulation (target_mode="sim") or high-bandwidth wired setups.' It also mentions the alternative tools (capture_topic_sync and inject_signal) by name, providing clear context for choosing this combined tool over separate calls.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Nescript/rm_mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server